Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Charles Hatton Reading Room
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 06-12-2008, 06:06 PM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunbar
jman, I finally got around to looking at this again. Let me see if I can produce some statistics without (1) making a mistake, or (2) putting you to sleep.

Here's what I did:

1. I calculated the average result of your 119 show bets. You lost an average of $0.008 per $2 show bet.

2. I calculated the standard deviation of your 119 show bets. The standard deviation is 0.94, based on $2 bets.*

3. I calculated the "standard error", which is the standard deviation divided by the square root of the number of bets. 0.94/sqrt(119) = 0.09.

Armed with this data, the challenge is to tell whether your good performance was just a matter of luck. (like a roulette player who just happens to hit a few numbers.)

Consider these two "tests":

Test 1: Can we distinguish jman's record from someone who loses at the track take, say 16%?

A -16% bettor would lose $0.32 per bet compared to jman's $0.008. A 32 cent loss is more than 3 standard errors worse than jman's loss. A 3-standard error result should occur by luck in about one in 700 cases. I think we can assume that jman's picks were clearly better than the track take.

Test 2: Can we distinguish jman from someone who picks well enough to lose at just 5%?

A -5% capper would lose $0.10 per $2 bet. That's about $0.09 worse than jman's result. The difference between a -5% capper and jman result for his 119 bets is about one standard error. That kind of difference occurs by luck about 1 time in 6. We can't really rule out the luck element at that level.

Bottom Line: Your picks clearly showed that the difference between your results and a dart-thrower is statistically significant. But we'd need more picks to say that you're doing better (in a statistically significant sense) than a capper who has a 5% average loss.

Bottom Line, version 2: There's less than 1 chance in 700 that a dart-throwing capper could have produced results as good as yours. There's about 1 chance in 6 that a capper who averages a 5% loss could have produced results as good as yours over the course of 119 bets.

--Dunbar

* one easy way to do this is use the Excel function, =STDEVA(C1:C119), where the payoffs are in cells C1 down to C119.
.

Excellent work as always Dunbar!
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.